There appears to be two different schools of thought regarding the accuracy of using burst mode in conjunction with test and copy. It is without question that burst mode alone is unwise. However, it makes sense to me that if the test and copy CRCs are a match, than the rip is as accurate as it can get. In fact, I believe I have read somewhere that the author of EAC (Andre Wiethoff) uses this method all the time. In my mind, matching CRCs are a better way to gauge the accuracy of a rip than a mere message saying "no errors occured."

I do somewhat question using this method on discs in less than fair condition. I do know that it is possible that a read error will give the same value twice in a row (but even secure mode would be compromised in that situation).

I would be perfectly comfortable using this method as well if it were not for the opinions of those that firmly belief secure mode is the ONLY way to go. I would not be opposed to using secure mode, except I am re-ripping my CD collection into a lossless format. (I am kicking myself because I used lossy the first time). I do not want to spend an entire year doing this (I have over 1,000 CDs).

Burst mode + Test & Copy is just as secure as secure mode with no C2 and caching disabled(if present) and getting "No errors occured" + 100% track quality. Secure mode with C2 enabled has the added advantage of also being able to detect consistent errors, but sadly they won't be reported as EAC reverts to it's standard majority voting system when uncorectable C2 errors are flagged.

You can go ahead and use Burst mode + Test & Copy without a doubt as it is atleast as safe as EAC's Secure mode, and just ignore people that dosen't know what they are talking about...

I use burst T&C because I consider it to be just as secure as secure mode, provided the CRCs match, and a lot less stressing on the drive. Only if the CRCs don't match do I re-rip the tracks in secure mode.

It's all simply a means to an end. Matching CRCs does not mean a rip was accurate. Precise, yes, accurate no.

I would dispute that. The track would be accurate. I would say it's near IMPOSSIBLE at such high rip speeds to get the SAME CRC if there was ANY errors on the disc. For all intents and purposes Bust Mode T & C with Matching CRC's is ACCURATE!

I would dispute that. The track would be accurate. I would say it's near IMPOSSIBLE at such high rip speeds to get the SAME CRC if there was ANY errors on the disc. For all intents and purposes Bust Mode T & C with Matching CRC's is ACCURATE!

I'm guessing you've never encountered a consistent error before?

I've seen plenty. The great thing about consistent errors is that you can easily reproduce your findings. Would you like to see some log files or links demonstrating this? No need to answer, here's one of the more troubling rips I've seen:

CODE

EAC extraction logfile from 9. September 2006, 0:07 for CDDire Straits / Alchemy Part One

I would say it's near IMPOSSIBLE at such high rip speeds to get the SAME CRC if there was ANY errors on the disc

Not at all, lets say for example (a frame which is made up of 2352 bytes) is ripped as (g is good, b is bad):

gggggggggbgggggggggg

it is a small part which is bad, the drive (depending on model) will self interpolate, that is it takes the last g sample before b and first g sample after b and draws a line between. If you were to rip twice on that drive you would think it was without error, when it does have an error.

It was odd how the CRCs matched then the rip later the next 2 matched, the quality is always 100%, perhaps c2 would find the error.

It would be interesting to see what the correct CRC for that cd is, have you ever had track 5 rip accurately according to accuraterip? (what about in r12 with c2 on and a high number of re-rips, say 700).

So Test&Copy in Burst mode is not recommentable anyway, but it's safe enough to copy without testing in secure mode without C2?

I'm switching around, when I have a mint CD to rip and it's not in accuraterip database, I rip in T&C Burst mode, both CRCs are always equal, only when D is scratched I use Secure Mode. Thought this way was OK...

I'm switching around, when I have a mint CD to rip and it's not in accuraterip database, I rip in T&C Burst mode, both CRCs are always equal, only when D is scratched I use Secure Mode. Thought this way was OK...

It usually is.

With my Plextor PX-716A I use T&C in secure mode, but only because -usefua works with the drive and the C2 performance is pretty reliable. Otherwise I'd be using burst mode like I do with all my other drives unless I've been given reason to believe that re-reading will be necessary in order to get an accurate rip as you've mentioned.

I thought it would be helpful to get the word out so that people might not be misguided into thinking that matching CRCs mean that rips are accurate.

Also, looks can be deceiving. I've seen brand new discs (that aren't copy protected) or discs that appear to be in mint condition that can't be ripped accurately. Chalk it up to a manufacturing defect, I guess.

QUOTE (JeanLuc @ Oct 16 2006, 11:12)

Now I know why I mostly rip with two different drives ... one does the test run, the other does the copy run.

You'll notice that various drives were used to rip the track I've given as an example and different drives got the same CRC. None of them got the rip right. Plextools wasn't able to get it right using the PX-760A either.

In general, I think this is a good idea to use different drives especially when using drives designed around different chipsets. IOW, using a PX-712 and a PX-708 probably won't give you as much diversity as a PX-712 and PX-230. I could have thown in a drive made by NEC instead of the PX-230, but I like hammering home that the PX-230 isn't a real Plextor. . Speaking of NEC, using one with a Pioneer probably won't do much good.

EDIT: BTW, Some people have suggested that using speed reduction in burst mode can produce more accurate results. How well this works will depend on the drive and the disc being ripped.

It is a shame Plextors are difficult to come by where I live. I had to order mine from the Internet. Only after I received it did I realize it was the PX-230A.

I do not want to ship it back, and I do not want to pay the $150 for the model you mentioned (PX-716A). I assume that matching CRCs, in conjunction with AccurateRip, will be sufficient in any mode. I just wish more of my discs were in its database.

Correction: I knew the drive was the PX-230. What I did not know, until after it arrived, was that this drive was the one dubbed "not a 'real' Plextor."